What Is Meant by "Marxist Epistemology"?

In contemporary Marxist philosophical studies, "epistemology" appears to be an outdated term. When this term is mentioned, people tend to associate it with at least two things: either "modern epistemology" or the "textbook system" formed by interpreting Marx's thought through the paradigm of modern epistemological philosophy. But in fact, if we do not narrowly understand "epistemology" as modern epistemology, whose core thesis is "the subject's cognition of the object," but instead broadly understand it as "cognition of cognition," we will see that "Marxist epistemology" is actually an important theoretical field that cannot be ignored. To conduct an in-depth exploration of this field, we must first answer the question: What is meant by "Marxist epistemology"?

在当代马克思哲学研究中，“认识论”似乎是一个过时的术语。提到该词，人们至少有两种联想：要么想到“近代认识论”，要么想到以近代认识论哲学范式解释马克思思想而形成的“教科书体系”。但事实上，如果我们不是将“认识论”狭义地理解为以“主体对于客体的认识”为核心论题的近代认识论，而是将其广义地理解为“对于认识的认识”，就会看到，“马克思认识论”实际上是一个无法忽视的重要理论领域。要对该领域进行深入探究，首先须回答这一问题：“马克思认识论”何谓？

The First Connotation of "Marxist Epistemology"

“马克思认识论”的第一层内涵

As a thinker, Marx grasped the movement of reality theoretically, exploring the historical preconditions and paths for human emancipation in the era of capitalism. This process is Marx's "cognition" or theoretical practice. Marx's theoretical self-awareness of his own theoretical practice is his cognition of his own cognition. Did Marx actually possess this kind of theoretical self-awareness? The answer is affirmative.

作为思想家的马克思以理论方式把握现实运动，探寻资本主义时代人的解放的历史性前提和路径，这一过程就是马克思的“认识”或理论实践。马克思对于自己的理论实践的理论自觉就是对于自己的认识的认识。马克思究竟有没有这种理论自觉呢？答案是肯定的。

This theoretical self-awareness is directly manifested as self-awareness concerning the object of cognition. The basic understanding of the object in modern epistemology is that the object can, by itself alone, become a direct object of cognition. Marx's new materialism began its transformation in the philosophical field precisely by breaking this understanding: "The chief defect of all hitherto existing materialism—that of Feuerbach included—is that the thing, reality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the form of the object or of contemplation, but not as sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively." [1]1 Karl Marx, "Theses on Feuerbach," Thesis 1. In this sentence, "sensuous human activity" should be understood as "sensuous" "human activity," that is, "human activity" which is holistic and cannot be one-sidedly reduced to mental activity. This activity, as the "subjective side" of the object, does not refer to "labor" or other practices containing the logic of individual activity that can be directly "traced back" according to causal connections as the "origin of the product," because understanding the object from the perspective of the "origin of the product" would only fall into the "bad infinity" of infinite regress, which is unhelpful for understanding the thing itself. A logical interpretation is to understand the "subjective side" as that which is necessarily inseparable from the object becoming the object it is, i.e., its most proximate ground or the mode of its givenness. Given that Marx's fundamental problematic concerns the question of "human emancipation," that is, the question of the real possibility of human emancipation in the era of capitalism, the "object" Marx directly confronts cannot be an abstract thing in any sense, but rather the social object of the capitalist era. The basic characteristic of this object lies in its "universal appearance" (individuals are integrated into a certain universal structure, thereby becoming the individualized existence of this structure itself). The most proximate ground necessarily associated with this specific object must be historical. Specifically, it is the historical real movement that makes its universal appearance possible, and this real movement, as the "common activity of all people," is practice.

这种理论自觉直接表现为关于认识对象的自觉。近代认识论关于对象的基本理解是，对象可以仅凭自身而成为直接的认识对象。而马克思的新唯物主义在哲学领域的变革，首先就是从打破这一理解开始的：“从前的一切唯物主义——包括费尔巴哈的唯物主义——的主要缺点是：对对象、现实、感性，只是从客体的或者直观的形式去理解，而不是把它们当作人的感性活动，当作实践去理解，不是从主体方面去理解。” 本句中“人的感性活动”，应被理解为“感性的”“人的活动”，也即具有整全性的、不能被片面归结为思维活动的“人的活动”。这种活动作为对象的“主体方面”，并不是指可被直接按照因果联系加以“回溯”、作为“产物之来历”的“劳动”或其他蕴含个体活动逻辑的实践，因为从“产物之来历”的意义上理解对象，只会陷入无限倒退的“坏无限”中，对理解事物本身并无助益。合乎逻辑的解释，是将“主体方面”理解为与“对象”之成为如此这般的对象必然密不可分者，即最切近根据或其给出方式。鉴于马克思的根本问题意识在于“人的解放”问题，也即资本主义时代人的解放的现实可能性问题，马克思直接面对的“对象”就不可能是任何意义上的抽象事物，而是资本主义时代的社会对象。这种对象的基本特征在于“普遍性外观”（个体被整合入某种普遍性结构从而成为这一结构本身的个体化存在），与这种特定对象必然相关联的最切近根据必定是历史性的。具体说来，是使其普遍性外观得以可能成立的历史性现实运动，而这种现实运动作为“所有人的共同活动”，就是实践。

An important theoretical foundation of Marx's philosophy lies precisely in this theoretical self-awareness of the object of cognition: the "object" cannot become an "object" by itself alone, but is necessarily co-present with the "historical ground" that makes it appear as an object. Thus, historical materialism has an important ideological premise: maintaining a high degree of theoretical self-awareness regarding the theoretical objects it confronts, avoiding unconsciously taking unexamined objects as its own objects. The basic goal of Marx's critique of Feuerbach, Hegel, and the Young Hegelians in the early period of the establishment of historical materialism, as well as his critique of various classical political economy theories during the period of his critique of political economy, was precisely to establish the object from the perspective of historical materialism. Without this preliminary work, Marx would not have been able to distinguish his philosophy from various forms of idealism, nor would he have been able to clarify his own position of "new materialism."

马克思哲学的重要理论基础正在于对认识对象的这一理论自觉：“对象”不能仅凭自身即成为“对象”，而是必然与使其作为对象而显现的“历史性根据”共同在场。这样，历史唯物主义就有一个重要思想前提：对于自身所面对的理论对象保持高度理论自觉，避免未经省察的对象不自觉地成为自己的对象。马克思在历史唯物主义创立初期对于费尔巴哈、黑格尔以及青年黑格尔派的批判，以及在政治经济学批判时期对于诸种古典政治经济学理论的批判，其基本目标正在于确立历史唯物主义视野下的对象。如果没有这一前提性工作，马克思就不可能把自己的哲学与形形色色的观念论区分开，甚至也不可能阐明自己的“新唯物主义”立场。

"Marx's philosophy's theoretical self-awareness of its object of cognition" constitutes the first connotation of "Marxist epistemology."

“马克思哲学对于其认识对象的理论自觉”构成“马克思认识论”的第一层内涵。

The Second Connotation of "Marxist Epistemology"

“马克思认识论”的第二层内涵

Because Marx's philosophy's theoretical self-awareness of the unique historical characteristics of its own object of cognition is manifested in the form of breaking the illusion of the object's independence and turning towards its mode of givenness, this necessarily requires implementing this theoretical self-awareness in its theoretical practice and achieving the rigor of theoretical construction. In fact, Marx's two main theoretical works throughout his life, namely the establishment of historical materialism and the development of the critique of political economy, were realized precisely through the demonstration of the rigor of his own theoretical construction.

由于马克思哲学对于自身认识对象的独特历史性特征的理论自觉是以打破认识对象的独立假象、朝向其给出方式的形式展现的，这就必然要求在其理论实践中贯彻这一理论自觉，实现理论建构的严格化。事实上，马克思一生的两项主要理论工作，即历史唯物主义的创立和政治经济学批判的开展，正是借助关于自身理论建构之严格性的证成的方式实现的。

On the one hand, historical materialism is not an abstract theory directly given in the manner of metaphysical dogmatism, but rather a total theoretical grasp of the objective dimension of the capitalist era, formed in the continuous questioning of the historical preconditions of the capitalist universal appearance constituted by specific historical things, i.e., universal empirical objects. This theoretical grasp, as a specific form of theoretical practice, starts from the mediating field of "material production," which most directly displays the universal characteristics of the capitalist era. By revealing the capitalist social structure (i.e., the mode of production) and its universal shaping force (i.e., productive forces) that make the universal appearance of this field manifest as it is, it seeks the historical ground for the emancipation of the proletariat. Every step of progress in this intellectual journey is achieved through the specific analysis of the universal characteristics of the current theoretical object and the questioning of its historical preconditions. This analysis and argumentation, which aims to demonstrate the inherent rigor of intellectual progress and uses itself as a medium (by raising and answering questions such as "why and how to examine historical things from a historical perspective," "what kind of historical object is the historical thing of the capitalist era," and "how to understand the mode of historical appearance of this kind of object"), not only answers the question of how historical materialism itself—a theoretical practice with human emancipation as its basic appeal—is possible, but also answers the question of the possibility of grasping the movement of reality in a total manner theoretically, i.e., within a specific intellectual process, in the capitalist era. This is the concrete manifestation of the epistemological dimension within historical materialism.

一方面，历史唯物主义并不是以形而上学的独断论方式直接给出的抽象理论，而是在对于由特定历史物即普遍性经验对象所构成的资本主义普遍性外观的历史性前提的不断追问中形成的关于资本主义时代客观性维度的总体性理论把握。这一理论把握作为一种特定形式的理论实践过程，从“物质生产”这一最直接地展现资本主义时代普遍性特征的中介性领域出发，通过对于使得这一领域的普遍性外观得以如此这般展现的资本主义社会结构（即生产方式）及其普遍性塑形力量（即生产力）的揭示，探寻无产阶级获得解放的历史性根据。这一思想历程的每一步进展，都要借助对于当下理论对象的普遍性特征的具体分析及其历史性前提的追问而实现。这种以展现思想进展的内在严格性为目标，并以自身为中介（通过提出和回答“为何以及如何在历史性视野中审视历史物”“资本主义时代的历史物是何种历史性对象”“如何理解该种对象之历史性显现的方式”等问题）推动思想进程的分析和论证，不仅回答了历史唯物主义这一以人的解放为基本诉求的理论实践本身何以可能的问题，更回答了在资本主义时代以理论方式即在一个特定思想进程中总体性地把握现实运动的可能性问题。这正是历史唯物主义中的认识论维度的具体体现。

On the other hand, Marx's critique of political economy also takes the demonstration of the rigor of theoretical practice as its basic mode of theoretical construction. The critique of political economy aims to explore the objective dimension and self-negating character of the capitalist mode of production itself. Its basic method is to understand the ideological concepts established by classical political economy in the form of abstract ideas ("eternal" economic categories or economic laws) as the bourgeois expression of the universal empirical appearance of the capitalist era, to trace the historical formal preconditions of the formal determinations exhibited by these abstract ideas, and then to conduct further formal analysis of the formal determinations of the conceptualized results formed by this operation, thereby continuously unfolding a structured theoretical construction of the capitalist mode of production and revealing the dimension of self-negation contained within it. This operation itself obviously has distinct methodological features, but it is difficult to imagine how Marx could have unfolded his unique theoretical construction of "rising from the abstract to the concrete" starting from the "commodity" in a "dialectical" manner without the reflection on and demonstration of the rigor of this theoretical practice itself as a precondition. In fact, whether in the manuscripts of *Capital* or in Volume I of *Capital*, we can find explicit content and implicit logic of Marx's demonstration of the rigor of his own research approach. These investigations not only analyze the specific formal determinations of particular theoretical objects to determine the reliability of the starting point, but also formulate specific investigation plans concerning the connection between these specific objects and their historical preconditions, in order to realize the "concrete analysis of concrete conditions" within the historical situation of capitalism.

另一方面，马克思的政治经济学批判同样以对于理论实践的严格性证成作为基本理论建构方式。政治经济学批判旨在对资本主义生产方式本身的客观性维度及其自否性进行探索，其基本方式在于，将古典政治经济学以抽象观念（“永恒”的经济范畴或经济规律）方式确立的意识形态观念理解为对于资本主义时代普遍性经验外观的资产阶级表达，并对这些抽象观念所展现的形式规定进行历史性形式前提的追溯，再继续对这一操作所形成的概念化成果的形式规定进行进一步的形式分析，从而不断展开对于资本主义生产方式的结构化理论建构，揭示其中蕴含的自否性维度。这一操作本身当然有明显的方法论特征，但这种方法论操作如果没有对于这种理论实践本身的严格性的反思和论证作为前提，很难想象马克思何以能够按照一种“辩证法”的方式展开从“商品”开始的独特的“从抽象上升到具体”的理论建构。事实上，无论是在《资本论》手稿还是《资本论》第一卷中，我们都可以发现马克思对自己的研究进路展开严格性论证的显性内容和隐性逻辑。这些考察不仅围绕特定理论对象的独特形式规定进行分析以确定起点的可靠性，而且就具体对象制定关于这种对象与历史性前提之关联的具体考察方案，以实现资本主义历史性情境下的“具体问题具体分析”。

Combining these two aspects of investigation, it can be said that "Marx's philosophy's theoretical self-awareness of the rigor of its own theoretical-practical process" constitutes the second layer of meaning of "Marx's epistemology."

综合这两个方面的考察，可以说，“马克思哲学对于其理论实践过程之严格性的理论自觉”就构成了“马克思认识论”的第二层含义。

The third connotation of "Marx's epistemology" and the answer to "What is Marx's epistemology"

“马克思认识论”的第三层内涵与“马克思认识论何谓”之答

With Marx's introduction of a new type of object of cognition and his self-awareness of the rigor of his own theoretical-practical process, the basic principle of the new materialism as commonly understood—namely, the logical priority of sensuous life—is able to be demonstrated. On the one hand, "sensuous life" within the perspective of historical materialism is not abstract but concrete (otherwise it would be merely an "idea")—with regard to the sensuous life of the capitalist era, it possesses a historical appearance of universality, and thus cannot be incorporated into the domain of idealism, which aims to seek universal essences, nor can it become "being" as the counterpart of abstract "thought"; it can only be subjected to an analysis of the meaning of this sensuous life through the Marxian theoretical practice of historical materialism. On the other hand, this sensuous life with an appearance of universality possesses an intrinsic correlation with the historical-real movement of capitalism and its overall shaping effect; therefore, it does not need to rely on abstract thought to seek and guarantee its connection with the dimension of objectivity (which idealism calls "essence"), but is directly related to the dimension of objectivity of social history (the mode of production—productive forces). Here, historical sensuous life is external to "thought" in the idealist sense, which is an inherent part of the theoretical self-awareness of Marx's philosophy's unique object of cognition; and the direct connection between historical sensuous life itself and objectivity is revealed in the process of demonstrating the rigor of Marx's theoretical practice mentioned above. In this context, it can be seen that if cognition of sensuous life cannot be separated from this life itself, but can only unfold within it and seek the dimension of objectivity of social history within it, then this sensuous life possesses logical priority; the revelation of this materialist principle in the sense of priority is precisely achieved through the distinctive mode of thinking of Marx's epistemology.

随着马克思对于新型认识对象的引入及其对于自身理论实践过程之严格性的自觉，人们通常所理解的新唯物主义的基本原则即感性生活之逻辑在先性的根据得以彰显。一方面，历史唯物主义视野中的“感性生活”不是抽象的，而是具体的（否则就只是一个“观念”）——就资本主义时代的感性生活而言，其具有历史性的普遍性外观，因而无法被纳入以探寻普遍性本质为目标的观念论论域，也即无法成为作为抽象“思维”之对方的“存在”，而只能通过历史唯物主义这一马克思式理论实践展开关于这种感性生活的意义分析。另一方面，这种具有普遍性外观的感性生活具有与资本主义历史性现实运动及其整体性塑性作用的内在相关性，因此无须依靠抽象思维来探寻和保障其与客观性维度（观念论称之为“本质”）的联系，而是与社会历史之客观性维度（生产方式—生产力）直接相关。在这里，历史性的感性生活之外在于观念论意义上的“思维”，是关于马克思哲学独特认识对象的理论自觉的题中应有之义；而历史性的感性生活本身与客观性的直接关联，又是在前述关于马克思理论实践之严格性的证成过程中得以展现的。在此语境下，可以看到，如果说关于感性生活的认识不能离开这种生活本身，而只能在其内部展开并在其中探寻社会历史之客观性维度，因而这种感性生活在逻辑上具有在先性的话，那么对于这种优先性意义上的唯物主义原则的揭示，正是通过马克思认识论的特殊致思方式而实现的。

Moreover, because Marx's cognition of his own theoretical practice is not another form of the self-movement of abstract thought, but should rather be understood as the "embodied" existence of the specific structure of the historical-real movement itself within the advancement of Marx's theoretical practice, Marx's new materialism can be further demonstrated as a thoroughgoing materialism. Specifically, the aforementioned historical structure, as a "manifestation-guidance" structure, provides the logical premise for Marx's theoretical practice and shapes its basic logical structure; moreover, for Marx, this "manifestation-guidance" structure is not abstract but concrete and historical, so that where idealists understand the various universalities of the capitalist era as "objects in general," Marx is able, by means of the specific characteristics of the historical "manifestation-guidance" structure itself (i.e., that "manifestation" appears in the special form of "universal empirical objects"), to question the premises of this universality, rather than stopping at the analysis of this universality itself, which in content seems to be "manifestation in general," because "manifestation" appears as "universality." In this way, he successfully avoids the "content trap" and escapes falling into the rut of idealism. What is shown here is Marx's theoretical self-awareness of the historicity of his own theoretical practice, and the demonstration of thoroughgoing materialism is achieved. It can be seen that although the specific structure of the historical-real movement is undoubtedly the real premise of all of Marx's thinking, without Marx's "embodied transformation" of this real premise at the epistemological level—that is, the cognition of theoretical practice unfolded on the basis of the fundamental characteristics of the historical structure itself as a logical premise—this real premise would become merely an abstract metaphysical premise.

不仅如此，由于马克思对于自己理论实践的认识并非另一种形式的抽象思维之自我运动，而毋宁应被理解为历史性现实运动的特定结构本身在马克思理论实践之推进中的“具身性”存在，从而使马克思的新唯物主义得以被进一步证成为一种彻底唯物主义。具体说来，上述历史性结构作为一种“显现—指引”结构，为马克思理论实践提供了逻辑前提并塑造了其基本逻辑结构；不仅如此，对于马克思来说，这一“显现—指引”结构不是抽象的，而是具体的和历史性的，从而在观念论者将资本主义时代的各种普遍性理解为“对象一般”的地方，马克思得以借助历史性“显现—指引”结构本身的具体特征（即“显现”以“普遍性经验对象”的特殊方式呈现），对这种普遍性进行前提追问，而不是由于“显现”显现为“普遍性”而停留于对这种在内容上似乎表现为“显现一般”的普遍性本身的分析，从而成功绕开了“内容陷阱”，避免落入观念论的窠臼。这里展现了马克思对于自身理论实践本身之历史性的理论自觉，并实现了对于彻底唯物主义的证成。可以看到，尽管历史性现实运动的特定结构无疑是马克思全部运思的现实前提，但如果没有马克思在认识论层面对于这一现实前提的“具身性转化”即基于历史性结构的根本特征本身而展开对于理论实践的认识作为逻辑前提，这种现实前提就会仅仅成为一种抽象的形而上学前提。

In this sense, it can be said that Marx's epistemology is itself the demonstration of thoroughgoing materialism; this is the third connotation of "Marx's epistemology."

在此意义上可以说，马克思认识论本身就是对于彻底唯物主义的证成，这是“马克思认识论”的第三层内涵。

Based on the above understanding of the three connotations of "Marx's epistemology," we can answer the question "What is Marx's epistemology?" as follows: The so-called "Marx's epistemology" refers to the cognition of cognition of the historical-real movement achieved by Marx's philosophy through its theoretical self-awareness of its object of cognition, its theoretical self-awareness of the rigor of its own theoretical-practical process, and its demonstration of thoroughgoing materialism.

基于上述关于“马克思认识论”三层内涵的理解，我们可以这样回答“马克思认识论何谓”这一问题：所谓“马克思认识论”，就是指马克思哲学通过对于其认识对象的理论自觉、对于其理论实践过程之严格性的理论自觉以及对于彻底唯物主义的证成而实现的对于自身关于历史性现实运动的认识的认识。

(The author is a professor at the School of Philosophy, Fudan University.)

（作者系复旦大学哲学学院教授）

Online editor: Huihui

网络编辑：慧慧